Author
Topic: What is the 6d actually good at (*positive* fact list)? (Read 30950 times)

I would like to keep my 60D of I got a 6D, but have a feeling im too poor for that option haha. Im still thinking about a 5dMkII but im a sucker for high-iso Low-noise.

Hmmm... why not, sell the 60D, get the 6D then get a G15? Since I doubt that you're into fast moving sports, a G15 with its super fast lens (F1.8... wow!) will enable you to get good quality pictures for those times that you leave your 6D at home... Currently I have a 500D + G11. I'm planning to get a 6D and give my wife the 500D. The G11, we can share between ourselves. Sometimes, I leave my DSLR at home and just brings the G11 due to convenience. In good light, I can still take very nice pictures of my daughter and do some macros and landscape with it.

Hmm, does this mean that C1 and C2 becomes viable for video settings as well? If so, then that would be another awesome feature for me.I really find it rather frustrating that I have to turn the mode-wheel to go into video mode, especially in situations where I switch back and forth between photo and video alot (like concerts, performances etc)As I have mentioned in many other threads (like Marsu, I am taking my time to decide and the research has almost turned into a part time job ) the only thing I need to overcome before pulling the trigger is my fear of the AF being the one thing that I will keep me thinking that I should have gone 5Dmk3. Apart from that, it looks like a killer camera for me. Now, if an app came out that would allow wifi-remote control in video mode as well, I'd have to get a new phone as well.. that would eliminate the need for a swivel LCD

...Unfortunately, unlike in the US in Germany there are nearly no "deals" or "instant rebates", just the regular Canon rebates (more limited than in the US and not including the gear I want) or eBay EU imports that aren't much cheaper either...

Well, if I were you, I'd hurry, because it sounds like the rest of the EU is going to empty the pockets of everyone in Germany before too much longer.

I've never shot a 5D3 but the 6D shots are just as sharp as my 5D2 shots... why would there be a difference in sharpness between any of the full frame sensors?

no.

actually the 5D MK2 has the highest spatial resolution of the three cameras.a lot of reviews confirm this.

but you have to shoot testcharts to see it or pixelpeep the same motive to notice it.yet it IS visible.

the reason is a marginal lower MP number (but that is really marginal) another reason could be a stronger AA filter. if thatß s the case it is a shame that there is so much moire in 6D videos.

anyway, not all FF sensors are equal...

I can believe that. But should any of that really affect your decision to get one of the 3 cameras over the other? I would say I'm part of the pixel peeper crowd (returned a perfectly good 85mm f/1.8 just because the photographs didn't look as good at 100% as the ones from my 70-200L II) but I seriously would never consider a 5D2 over the 5D3 because the sensor produces sharper images when shooting test charts.

Looking at the 6d moiré, it doesn't seem to be the aa filter but that 6d has more forced noise reduction even in raw, thus the large difference in chroma noise to the 5d3. The result is about 1/3 stop more usable iso but with a visible loss of sharpness - both not important enough as a deciding factor, but it adds to the list.

... and +1 for not countering a tech discussion with "get a life, got out and shoot more" - that mixing apples and oranges with an insulting tendency because obviously even the "anti-gearheads" read these tech threads or they wouldn't be able to post replies.

Btw: I added the fact to the above list that the 6d has a high(er) dr vs. the Canon counterparts, but of course is sunk by any current Nikon sensor - see http://www.sensorgen.info/

I can believe that. But should any of that really affect your decision to get one of the 3 cameras over the other? I

i agree, but that is a different point.

in this forum a lot of people spend more time arguing about technical stuff then shooting.so you have to be technical correct!

the canon fanboys can talk hours about sharpness of one lens vs. the other.

but don´t you dare to say canon sensors lack behind sony/nikon.. then you will hear that doesnt matter. i guess that is called "selective reality".

i find it somewhat interesting that a 5 year old canon sensor produces sharper images then the new FF sensors.it´s not much, sure.but be honest, you would expect sharper images not softer images from a new sensor.

Whether it matters depends on whether it makes a difference to the sort of photography you do. I own a 5DII and, within the past couple of months I've rented the 5DIII, 6D and D600 (the latter two simultaneously). I haven't performed any properly controlled tests - certainly nothing compared to what someone conducting a serious review involving test charts, etc. - but merely used them as I would normally use a camera (except that with the 6D and D600 I kept switching back and forth, photographing the same thing from the same place at the same time). While the D600 made good photos, not one ever struck me as superior to those I took with the 6D in any way; at most the differences were fairly small/trivial, and where I had a preference it was for the Canon, mainly because I preferred the colors. So other features were decisive - Nikon's absurdly complicated controls, the weird greenish cast to the D600's monitor, its drab viewfinder (so what if it's 100%?), etc. Relatively trivial stuff I would put up with if it made noticeably better photos, but for my purposes it didn't. I will cheerfully concede that others may conclude otherwise.

As for whether the sensor of the 6D makes "softer" photos than the 5DII or 5DIII, while it's true that it has slightly lower resolution than the sensors of the other two, that's only one factor that determines the sharpness of a photo, and those differences may work in favor of the 6D or 5DIII vs the 5DII. I wonder how many people, in a "blind" test, could tell the difference (and how many of those who have remarked on the softness of 6D images were looking at images from RAW files).

Whether it matters depends on whether it makes a difference to the sort of photography you do. I own a 5DII and, within the past couple of months I've rented the 5DIII, 6D and D600 (the latter two simultaneously). I haven't performed any properly controlled tests - certainly nothing compared to what someone conducting a serious review involving test charts, etc. - but merely used them as I would normally use a camera (except that with the 6D and D600 I kept switching back and forth, photographing the same thing from the same place at the same time). While the D600 made good photos, not one ever struck me as superior to those I took with the 6D in any way; at most the differences were fairly small/trivial, and where I had a preference it was for the Canon, mainly because I preferred the colors. So other features were decisive - Nikon's absurdly complicated controls, the weird greenish cast to the D600's monitor, its drab viewfinder (so what if it's 100%?), etc. Relatively trivial stuff I would put up with if it made noticeably better photos, but for my purposes it didn't. I will cheerfully concede that others may conclude otherwise.

+100 I doubt many people have actually done this. So what 's your preference 5D3 or 6D after using them?

I wonder how many people, in a "blind" test, could tell the difference (and how many of those who have remarked on the softness of 6D images were looking at images from RAW files).

According to a good German review 6d/5d3 on traumflieger the difference is visible when shooting details like a fern with tiny leaves - and of course they used raw files. But again, nothing very important if not shooting specialized shots like product shots or maybe some architecture.

You didn't ask me, but here's my 2ct anyway :-p after a 3/4 hour side-to-side comparison in a shop just now: The 5d3 is clearly the more professional camera with absolutely superior af - though for some reason or another the 7d grip fits my hand better than the 5d3, 6d is also just fine.

But all things considered, the 5d3 is just like the 6d a typical Canon dslr, I doubt my current shots would improve that much when getting the higher spec'ed camera. So there's no way I'd spend nearly €3000 for a camera body with a soon-to-be-replaced sensor if I'm note having a guaranteed return of invest like a pro would.

And last not least I'm more used to the 60d-style multicontroller and always feel like there's the buttons missing on the wheel - but that would certainly change sooner or later when using a 7d/5d2/5d3-type.

Disclaimer: Of course I would buy a 5d3 for the 6d price or exchange my 70-300L for the 70-200Lii for free.

I longed for a full frame camera for its depth of field, but 5D is too much. So I was thinking of 60D for so long, 600 came, 650 came. But I still want 60D for its built, I was attached to the number "6".

The time came when I decide to buy, suddenly the 6D came out, How can I not buy this one. I am a happy owner of it.

Sometimes the subject is not in the focus point reach, especially in the sides and corner, so you need to focus and recompose. - I looked at this issue as, this camera is entry level, it was meant for beginner or amateur,. you need to give some space for learning, toning your skills.

Now with my composition, i can make the focus point to be where my subject is.

I've never shot a 5D3 but the 6D shots are just as sharp as my 5D2 shots... why would there be a difference in sharpness between any of the full frame sensors?

no.

actually the 5D MK2 has the highest spatial resolution of the three cameras.a lot of reviews confirm this.

but you have to shoot testcharts to see it or pixelpeep pictures of the same motive to notice it.yet it IS visible.

the reason is a marginal lower MP number of the 6D (but that is really marginal) another reason is the difference in the AA filter.

i guess the 6D has a stronger AA filter then the other two cameras.if that´s the case it is a shame that there is so much moire in 6D videos.

anyway, not all FF sensors are equal...

Im kind of a pixel peeper myself, but almost by accident. I am viewing my shots at 24" on a 1920x1200 monitor, and judging them. My wife wanted a 8.5x11 print of a tiger lilly I shot last summer, and on my PC I thought, ehh, its not real sharp but W/E and had a print of it made. at 8.5x11 in our hallway it looks super-sharp, and gets alot of comments. Maybe a 2' print in a restaurant on a wall, 1' from someones face it may look soft. SOOO many amazing shots have come from 12 MP 5d classics, and alot even cropped. Just a little point on pixel peeping I guess, Rant over haha